In places like the United States, where vegetables like carrots are neither expensive nor scarce, it’s difficult to grasp just how pervasive, dire, and deadly a simple vitamin deficiency can be.

Children whose diets are chronically low or lacking in vitamin A are at high risk for xerophthalmia, the most common cause of preventable childhood blindness, and insufficient vitamin A can make children more likely to catch an infection and more likely to die from one when they do.

In 1992, a team of researchers from Johns Hopkins calculated that increasing consumption of vitamin A, without any other interventions or nutritional improvements, could prevent 1.3 to 2.5 million deaths among infants and preschoolers every year. That’s more than the number of children killed each year by measles, whooping cough, and tetanus combined.

Programs that aim for widespread distribution of vitamin supplements certainly exist, though they are expensive, complicated, and difficult to sustain. Such programs also sometimes fail to reach the most vulnerable populations in remote rural regions.

But if a food that people are already eating could be transformed into a nutritional powerhouse, it could help save the eyesight and the lives of millions of children and mothers around the world. Each time farmers harvested the crop, they would have a simple food with the impact of a life-saving medication.

In fact, such a miracle crop already exists. It’s called “Golden Rice.”

So why has it been met with so much opposition?

What Is Golden Rice?

International Rice Research Institute

From the beginning, Golden Rice was conceived as a project that could significantly improve global health, even though it seemed terribly futuristic when it was first proposed.

“Identified in the infancy of genetic engineering as having the potential for the biggest impact for the world’s poor, beta-carotene-producing rice was initially funded by the Rockefeller Foundation and the European Union,” writes Amy Harmon of The New York Times. Beta-carotene, the pigment that makes carrots and squash orange, turns into vitamin A in the human body.

“In a decade of work culminating in 1999,” Harmon writes, “two academic scientists, Ingo Potrykus and Peter Beyer, finally switched on the production of beta carotene by adding daffodil and bacteria DNA to the rice’s genome.”

Scientists later swapped out the daffodil DNA for corn DNA, vastly increasing the amount of beta-carotene in the special rice, whose resulting yellowish colour resembled the flesh of a ripe mango.

“From the outset, it seemed totally crazy,” Potrykus said, in an interview with New Scientist, explaining what a longshot the technology was when they first tried it. “It was a surprise that it worked.”

Neth Daño, an agricultural policy researcher and advocate in the Philippines, told NPR that some see Golden Rice as a public relations campaign for genetically modified foods and biotechnology, rather than the most pragmatic solution.

Still, The Gates Foundation and other major donors see Golden Rice as an important potential tool in fighting Vitamin A deficiency, and so — in spite of protests and plenty of red tape — the project has moved forward.

Even after scientists created the proof-of-concept Golden Rice, much tweaking and additional research was needed. The beta-carotene-rich rice needed to be traditionally bred to work with favoured local rice varieties, a process that is time-consuming and complicated.

And Golden Rice backers needed to prove that in spite of what was, for many, unfamiliar technology, the resulting product would be as reliable as supplements for curbing deficiencies.

Finally, in a 2009 study, scientists showed that Golden Rice was an effective source of vitamin A, and in a follow-up study, they found that it was as good as pure beta-carotene and better than spinach at providing vitamin A to children.

Today, five field trials are wrapping up in the Philippines, primarily testing whether the crop will behave in a way that makes it appealing to local farmers. Researchers will also do additional safety and efficacy testing before Golden Rice goes up for approval, which could happen as soon as 2016.

In many countries where rice is an important staple, vitamin A deficiency and its associated hazards are endemic.

Wikimedia Commons / data from WHO

Plain white rice is a relatively robust source of energy, but has few nutrients.The seeds of white rice contain no vitamin A, but just one bowl of golden rice would fulfil60% of a child’s daily vitamin Aneeds.

“When children are weaned, they’re often weaned on a rice gruel,” Gary Toenniessen, a Rockefeller Foundation microbiologist, explained to NPR.

“And if they don’t get any beta-carotene or vitamin A during that period, they can be harmed for the rest of their lives.”

While supplemental nutrition programs are both helpful and necessary, they are not enough, and funding irregularities and logistical challenges can make them an inconsistent source of vitamin A.

Golden Rice, once it is widely released, will be much more cost-effective, as agricultural economist Alexander Stein has shown. Despite common misconceptions, no one stands to get rich when poor farmers start growing Golden Rice.

Instead, it will represent a fundamentally different approach, an embodiment of the old “teach a man to fish” adage.

International Rice Research InstituteDr. Antonio Alfonso harvests Golden Rice during a field trial in The Philippines.

“It can be planted by the farmers using seeds from their own harvest and that would provide sustained supply of betacarotene,” Antonio A. Alfonso, Ph.D., the Golden Rice project leader at the Philippine Rice Research Institute told Business Insider.

“The bottom line is that [Vitamin A deficiency] affects millions of children and women, making them prone to blindness and susceptible to common infections. Golden Rice, if given the chance, could help.”

Patrick Moore, Ph.D., an early member of Greenpeace and an outspoken, sometimes controversial, advocate of Golden Rice, is even more emphatic.

“At a certain point, you need to be willing to make a leap of faith,” he said, in a phone interview. “The risk of not moving forward with this is the continuation of 2 million children dying every year.”

“If Golden Rice were a medicine that could cure a disease like malaria,” he added, “it would have been approved ages ago.”

Tagged In

Discuss

An excellent article. Just one crucial omission: it's ORGANIC ACTIVISTS who are dead-set opposed to Golden Rice. Failure to mention them is tantamount to not mentioning the religion of those who committed the attack on the Twin Towers on 9-11.

The illuminati are actively planning to reduce the planet's population by 50-60% by starving us out.
They don't even make much of a secret about it, the information is readily available. GM monster foods are a big part of the plan.

Malnutrition, including vitamin deficiencies, and starvation are problems of poverty, inequity and social injustice which make food unavailable and unaffordable to around 1 billion people. Malnutrition cannot be solved by genetically manipulating a crop to add just one nutrient to an unbalanced diet lacking fresh fruits and vegetables, and dominated by a nutrient deficient staple such as rice, cassava, bananas or sweet potato. Like other polished rice, Golden Rice is deficient in many micro-nutrients such as iron and zinc which are also essential for good health. Every community should give top priority to making a diverse diet of good food affordable and accessible to everyone, and empowering people with publicly owned seed and land to grow their own food. This food sovereignty may be a durable solution to nutrient deficiency but Golden Rice is not.

The problems you ascribe to golden rice - that it does not solve all of malnutrition - applies to ordinary rice, only more so because ordinary rice is not a good source of vitamin A.

So basically, you are arguing that people who suffer from malnutrition in these areas of the world should stop eating rice altogether.

It's an interesting argument. Weird, but interesting. I'm not sure the people in question would agree with you.

If I can identify a logical flaw, it's that you treat all causes of malnutrition as if they are simple and act at the same distance. Poverty creates malnutrition because it prevents access to nutritious foods in complex ways - not only in resources to purchase nutritious food, but also supply of food, control over agricultural land (the land itself and what can be grown there), access to education and so on. Poor people are not simply poor as individuals, but as part of a system that creates and exacerbates their dire situation. It's a tremendously complex problem.

If you would rather wait until the whole of that system is changed, rather than at least ameliorate a problem that causes the death and blindness of millions while we also work to change the system, then you're either in logical error, or you have your priorities wrong.

Wally Right provides an excellent example of the kind of rampant moronism keeping useful innovations like this from helping millions of people. The illuminati? (no such thing). "GM monster foods"? Puh-leeze. And tell us, how does giving away rice with extra vitamin A work as part of a plan to starve anyone?

Oh, never mind, don't tell us. I think it is just a fact of life that a certain fraction of our population finds it very gratifying to spew alarming but fictional conspiracies, and facts are no obstacle as they can all be dismissed as part of the conspiracy. It gratifies people like "Wally Right" to feel that they have unique insight into the world, and when people laugh at their fantasies, it only confirms their conviction that the rest of us are just brainwashed, or worse, part of The Big Conspiracy. Ultimately, the question of why Wally says what he says is probably best left to mental health professionals.

While I think the reference to 9/11 is inappropriate, you are right to mention the role of the organics industry in funding and promoting anti-science propaganda on GMOs.

For some reason, people on the left are happy to (quite rightly) decry the role of corporate financing in science denial on climate change, but embrace the same pattern if corporate funding when it comes to GMOs. And I say that as someone on the left.